JUDGMENT

HANSARIA, J. :—In this appeal we are basically concerned with the interpretation of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 (for short the Act) as amended by Bombay Act No. 33 of 1952. Being concerned with a legislation beneficial to tenants, the Courts are required to give a liberal interpretation; and if we can foretell our conclusion, according to us, the amendment of 1952 would relate back to the Act as enacted. In any case, the amendment would apply to the suit which was pending when the amendment had come into force. In view of this conclusion of ours, the appeal shall have to be dismissed, as the amendment has given benefit to the tenants, who are respondents in this appeal.

2. The facts which need be noted for the disposal of the appeal are that the appellants filed a suit on 25-4-1949 for possession of the land under the occupation of the defendants. The suit had come to be filed after the plaintiffs had issued a notice to defendants 1 and 2 on 19-10-1947 under Section 7 of the Bombay Tenancy Act, 1939 terminating the tenancy and claiming that the land was required for personal cultivation. The possession was demanded by the notice on the expiry of 31st